sneff above continues the longstanding propaganda war being waged by members of the Botanical/Culinary Cabal (of which sneff is an admitted member) to convince the innocent public that there is in fact "a long standing misconception that nectarines are a cross between a peach and a plum". Sure, many people think it. And with good reason, too: I say, knowing the next apple I eat may well be poisoned, that NECTARINES ARE A CROSS BETWEEN A PEACH AND A PLUM.
Notice how sneff's diabolical argument proceeds: An unsubstantiated claim that some mysterious "recessive gene" makes a peach into a nectarine. Think about it: one gene, three differences. True to the form of the B/CC, sneff tries to make light of these differences. Yet even he must admit that these so-called "slight" differences are "enough to ensure this fruit has its own loyal followers". Suddenly not-so-recessive-"slight"-differences, eh Mr. sneff (if that is your real name)?? Of course, in an age when genomes are sequenced on a day to day basis, "sneff" doesn't bother to give us a GenBank id for this so-called putative gene. I proclaim, despite the threats of the B/CC, that NECTARINES ARE A CROSS BETWEEN A PEACH AND A PLUM.
Then we're treated to some "historical" speculation (even "sneff" admits it is entirely unfounded) that Alexander the Great brought peaches and nectarines from China, despite the fact that he'd never been anywhere near China, and despite the fact that he must have known these 2 fruits were, in fact, the same fruit, varying only by some conveniently recessive gene. Why bring both, if they are in fact only one? Recall that Alexander the Great's tutor was Aristotle, the inventor of Biology and therefore presumably the founder of the B/CC. I say, against close to 2,500 years of lies piled up against free thinkers by the B/CC, that NECTARINES ARE A CROSS BETWEEN A PEACH AND A PLUM.
What have we had so far? A HYPOTHESIZED (not sequenced) "gene", and some vague appeal to authority based on legend. Any thinking person will say, as I do, that NECTARINES ARE A CROSS BETWEEN A PEACH AND A PLUM.
It only goes downhill from there for sneff and the rest of the B/CC. The Latin name (presumably Latin is introduced here to exclude lay persons from the discussion) for a nectarine is "Prunus persica var. nectarina". See the first word? "Prune". A prune is a plum. So much for being a recessive peach rather than a plum. Even the name says it: NECTARINES ARE A CROSS BETWEEN A PEACH AND A PLUM.
Cognizant of his failure to supply any form whatsoever of logical argument (let alone proof), sneff proceeds to Aristotles' favourite rhetorical device: he bribes the reader with a recipe for sweets. "Poach" them, indeed. But even here, elementary logic foils sneff. If nectarines are, in fact, peaches, why would we need a separate recipe for nectarines? Why isn't sneff merely pointing us to a recipe for peaches? Even an admitted member of the B/CC such as sneff is forced to admit that NECTARINES ARE A CROSS BETWEEN A PEACH AND A PLUM.
Though I fear B/CC forces have located the computer terminal from which I am broadcasting, I will risk deploying one more fact. Truth and Freedom are what separate us from the animals; I cannot be held but to these two. Hebrew has a colloquial (the B/CC infiltrated the Hebrew Language Academy many years ago, of course) word for nectarine. It's formed by running together the words for "peach" and "plum". This is the language God used to talk to Moses; in Hebrew, NECTARINES ARE A CROSS BETWEEN A PEACH AND A PLUM.